Kiyemba v. Bush
Kiyemba v. Bush (Civil Action No. 05-cv-01509) is a petition for habeas corpus filed on behalf of Jamal Kiyemba, a Ugandan citizen formerly held in extrajudicial detention in the United States' Guantanamo Bay detention camps, in Cuba. Mr. Kiyemba is the "next friend" of each of the nine Uighur petitioners who seek the writ of habeas corpus through the petition. Susan Baker Manning and a team of Bingham McCutchen lawyers are counsel for his petition, and those of nine other men whose petitions were attached to his. Kiyemba has been repatriated. But most of the other men remain in captivity. The Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (DTA) closed off the right of Guantanamo captives to submit new petitions of habeas corpus. (Pending cases were left open.) The DTA opened a path for Guantanamo captives to submit a limited appeal to Federal Courts of appeal in Washington DC. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA) closed down the pending habeas corpus cases. Attorneys for the captives have both initiated a challenge to the constitutionality of the MCA's stripping of the right to habeas corpus; and they have initiated appeals in the DC Federal Courts of appeal. The DTA's limited avenue of appeal only allows challenges as to whether the Combatant Status Review Tribunal correctly followed their rules. Manning has initiated steps to have her remaining clients status reviewed in the Washington DC courts. Military Commissions Act The Military Commissions Act of 2006 mandated that Guantanamo captives were no longer entitled to access the US civil justice system, so all outstanding habeas corpus petitions were stayed. mirror Boumediene v. Bush On June 12, 2008 the United States Supreme Court ruled, in Boumediene v. Bush, that the Military Commissions Act could not remove the right for Guantanamo captives to access the US Federal Court system. And all previous Guantanamo captives' habeas petitions were eligible to be re-instated. Re-initiation On July 18, 2008 George M. Clarke III filed a "Uighur petitioners' status report" on behlf of the seventeen Uyghur captives in Guantanamo. mirror In the status report Clarke named seven Uyghur captives whose habeas petitions were amalgamated with Kiyemba v. Bush. Their names were: Abdul Nasser, Abdul Sabour, Abdul Semet, Hammad Memet, Huzaifa Parhat, Jalal Jalaldin, Khalid Ali and Sabir Osman. On 2008-07-22 Susan Baker Manning filed a "Huzaifa Parhat's motion for judgment on his ''habeas petition ordering release into the continental United States"'' in Civil Action No. 05-cv-1509 (RMU). On 2008-07-23 Manning filed a "NOTICE OF FILING" on behalf of Abdusabur Doe (ISN 275). On 2008-07-25 Manning filed a "Huzaifa Parhat's motion for immediate release on parole into the continental United States pending final judgment on his ''habeas petition". On 2008-08-15 Manning filed a "REPLY OF HUZAIFA PARHAT TO GOVERNMENT’S OPPOSITION TO MOTIONS FOR PAROLE AND JUDGMENT ORDERING RELEASE". On 2008-10-01 Manning filed a "PETITIONERS’ SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM IN RESPONSE TO GOVERNMENT’S NOTICE OF STATUS". On 2008-10-07 Manning filed a "PETITIONERS’ PROFFER REGARDING AVAILABLE SERVICES AND SUPPORT FOR RESETTLEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES". On 2008-10-07 Manning filed a "Proposed order". On 2008-10-22 Manning filed a "Emergency motion for order related to counsel visit of October 27, 2008". Appeal After the men were ordered to be released by the US District Court the Department of Justice appealed that ruling to a panel of court of appeals. The Court of Appeals ruled that the courts lacked the authority to force men held in Guantanamo to be released on US territory. Kiyemba v. Obama, also known as Kiyemba I One of the unresolved issues raised by the re-initiation of the Guantanamo captives' habeas petitions is whether Federal civilian judges have the authority to order the Executive Branch to set captives free in the United States. The United States Supreme Court has considered making a ruling in the case of the Kiyemba petitioners, over whether the Judicial Branch has that authority. In 2009 the State Department was able to get Bermuda to offer residency to four of the Uyghur captives. A delegation from the small Pacific Ocean State of Palau visited the Uyghurs in Guantanamo, and eventually offered residency to all but one of the Uyghur captives. The one Uyghur captive for whom Palau decline to offer residence was Arkin Mahmud, who had travelled to Afghanistan to look for his younger brother, Bahtiyar Mahnut, who their family was concerned had disappeared into Afghanistan. He was one of the eldest Uyghurs, and, he became seriously mentally ill in Guantanamo -- ill-enough that Palau did not feel did not have the mental health support infrastructure to heal him. His younger brother felt that he could not abandon the brother who had only travelled to Afghanistan to try to rescue him. In February Switzerland accepted the two brothers, leaving only five Uyghurs in Guantanamo. Since the other five remaining Uyghurs have been offered residency in Palau some legal scholars have speculated that the Supreme Court will decline to rule on the Kiyemba habeas, because they have the option of moving to Palau. Kiyemba II Kiyemba II is the name for habeas corpus petitions filed on behalf of ten Guantanamo captives, who fear being repatriated to their country of citizenship. mirror mirror mirror In April 2009 a three judge panel of DC Circuit court of appeals reversed the ruling of [[District Court Judges, stating that they had no authority to rule whether the executive branch could send captives back to their home countries, when they feared torture or other abuse there. On September 10, 2010, the entire court sat to review the case, en banc. Their decision was split six to five, confirming their colleagues ruling. However the five dissenters wrote a long opinion, and commentators have speculated that the case will be heard before the Supreme Court. References Category:Guantanamo captives' habeas corpus petitions